All of a sudden, everyone is talking about the possibility of impeaching Barack Obama.

Drudge is writing about it. Sean Hannity is talking about it. Dick Morris is saying that the potential scandal is "enormous.". Karl Rove called it an "extraordinary charge." WorldNetDaily.com wrote that "it could be grounds for impeachment."

What happened? The story surrounding the alleged bribe of Congressman Joe Sestak initially broke way back in February. We wrote about it then, but it never broke out into the mainstream media. But because of activist pressure and the courageous work of California Congressman Darrell Issa the story refused to die.

ImpeachObamaCampaign.com alone has delivered more than 750,000 petitions to Congress in support of impeachment. Make no mistake, patriotic Americans are driving this sudden turn of events. It is a testament to what can happen when patriotic Americans refuse to look the other way, and they make their voices heard in a real and meaningful way. It didn't hurt that Obama has failed to answer the questions surrounding the attempted bribe of Congressman Joe Sestak.

So did Barack Hussein Obama commit a felony by offering Congressman Joe Sestak a "high ranking" Cabinet position to drop out of the Pennsylvania Senate race against Sen. Arlen Specter?

Let's be clear. The commission of an actual felony is not actually required in order to impeach a sitting president, but if Sestak's allegation is true, and if Barack Hussein Obama's fingerprints are all over this offer, that's a felony, and drawing up Articles of Impeachment against Barack Obama becomes a necessity.

According to Judge Andrew Napolitano with Fox News: "Federal law makes it a felony to offer 'anything of value' to an official of the government in return for a decision in your favor by that official of the government; it is called bribery."

And Congressman Darrell Issa has been relentlessly pushing the matter. He's called on Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the allegation, but Holder is essentially ignoring the request.

Recently, Issa directly challenged Holder: "You don't answer or apparently investigate. ... You're not investigating whether it's a false statement by a member of Congress or a crime by the White House. What are we to do?"

Back in February, Sestak confirmed to Larry Kane, a Philadelphia talk-show host, that the White House dangled a "high ranking" job in front of him to convince him to drop his primary challenge against incumbent Arlen Specter.

Initially, the Obama White House denied the accusation. According to a Fox News report: "White House official told Fox News that Sestak is expected to 'clarify' the allegation."

But Sestak didn't take the hint... he didn't "clarify" the accusation.

He stood by his statement and told Fox News: "I was asked a direct question yesterday and I answered it honestly."

Just prior to the Pennsylvania primary, Issa confronted Holder directly, but Holder refused to comment on the case. When Issa questioned Holder on why he had not responded to his request for a special prosecutor, Holder simply said that he thought he had responded to the request and offered his apologies.

Is it possible that Sestak lied, or that he was simply mistaken?

It seems unlikely as White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs issued the following carefully guarded statement to the press: "I'm told whatever conversations have been had are not problematic" and Gibbs added that the matter was "in the past."

Stonewalling... obstruction... but it's clear by Gibbs' statement that someone made Sestak an offer.

Keeping in mind that only Barack Obama has the authority to appoint an individual to his own Cabinet, the only question that remains is: What did Obama know and when did he know it?

It is a pipe dream unless and until there is a SOLID Republic Majority in both the US Senate and US House of Represenatives, as of the afternoon of 3 January 2011.

And, that the Republicans sitting in office new or returned, are overwhelmingly NOT RINOS, but have b*lls of brass, and listen to the people.

Only THEN will we have the "Impeachment Congress of 2011", something I have agitated here as a November 2010 strategy, but was laughed off of one of the FR forums by some people proclaiming to be much more politically savvy.

I tell you, this is the year, and it can be done. But that hurdle must accordingly be cleared first, otherwise all of this will be only hot air.

5
posted on 05/29/2010 6:39:28 AM PDT
by AmericanInTokyo
(If war comes, it will be because Obama was perceived, and rightly so, by our deadly enemies, as WEAK)

The thing about this issue is that it’s simply a case of bribery pure and simple so most folks don’t have any trouble understanding it. Obama and company can try to thread the needle by claiming that what they offered wasn’t exactly a “job” but that ain’t going to fly from a PR stand point.

Personally I think there is a lot of quiet discontent among elected democrats who have been hung out to dry for Obama. At some point, its going to come back and bite him.

It's going to be very difficult for many of them to disassociate themselves from their messiah. They bought into their own propaganda that he would be politically invincible so they tied themselves firmly to his ship. Now that it's taking on water they'll find it quite difficult to cut the ties.

Congressman Issa is tough. He's a really good guy too. He was recently at a rally to honor a fallen civil servant. I know because my husband and friend were there too. They all ride. He and his friend recognized Cong. Issa. He was there by himself. There with NO cameras, no interviews....just doing the right thing.

Obama as the first black POTUS would never be impeached. Even if the GOP controlled both houses and actually have the votes to move froward for impeachment in the house, the Senate would never vote to convict. The country would be politically damaged beyond repair for decades

There seems to be a serious lack of real evidence for impeachment. The bar for "high crimes" and "misdemeanors" are set pretty high to remove a POTUS.

Not going to happen unless some real chit hits the fan and it is obvious to all, even the soft left would support it.

PS. I would love to see this poser fraud lead away in handcuffs but it isn't going to happen

At least over this Sestack affair. I’m quite prepared to believe that in his remaining time Obama may do something that would demand impeachment. However, he’s probably have to exert some strenuous effort for that to happen, so we may be safe.

I think impeachment would be a distraction (for both sides), it would absolutely rally his base, it might win him back sympathy from some moderates (esp. if it was over BS like this Sestak thing, I think we all know stuff like this probably DOES happen ALL the time), and those lap dogs in the MSM, who at least are doing a little ankle biting now, would jump right back onto the pillow.

No, this is not what we need to be doing. We need to be focused on getting rid of as many Dims as possible this November. Then we need to focus on finding a person who can be a good candidate and a good president to hand the big O his walking papers in January 2013.

We also need to pay attention to our own state and local pols, at least if you live in a dem infested state like I do, in NJ. This party needs to be broken and destroyed and since it is the oldest and largest political party in the US that is a daunting task. But, let us give credit where credit it due, Obama is helping a lot with that right now, why would we want to stop him?

“Back in February, Sestak confirmed to Larry Kane, a Philadelphia talk-show host, that the White House dangled a “high ranking” job in front of him to convince him to drop his primary challenge against incumbent Arlen Specter.”

750,000 signatures on a petition mean nothing to a bunch of communists who rammed government take over of health care down the people’s throat. The only thing that will get this “thing” out of office is a Divine intervention. How He intervenes is up to Him.

I agree with you 100 percent and those who laughed at you are the reason we are the minority. I had warned them in 2008 that if the Rats get the majority it would be decades, perhaps generations until we can take it back. You can be sure the dems will do anything to hang on to their majority

Suppose Bill Clinton told a white lie for Barack Obama with the intention of helping him out with this Sestak problem. Bill Clinton will not take the fall for Barack. Meaning Bill will spill the beans when it’s politically expedient. Now who would be left to pick up the pieces? If Barack trusted Bill, it was very stupid of him.

Suppose Bill Clinton told a white lie for Barack Obama with the intention of helping him out with this Sestak problem. Bill Clinton will not take the fall for Barack. Meaning Bill will spill the beans when its politically expedient. Now who would be left to pick up the pieces? If Barack trusted Bill, it was very stupid of him.

I must admit that very same thought did cross my mind along with I'm sure many others. You can't ever put anything past the Clintons.

We should remember that constitutionally, impeachment is a political process, not a judicial process. It is congress that sets the standard for the definition and proof of “high crimes and misdemeanors”. Congress has long since forsaken Blackstone and English common law in that regard.

Impeachment and removal will not happen until and unless an overwhelming majority of sitting Senators and Representatives believe that their personal political interests are served by that course of action.

Sestak would have to be on tape saying specifically what was offered. And then it would be one “man’s” word against the other. The only way this could possibly go anywhere is for the “offer” to be on tape and then I doubt it would lead to impeachment. Every democrat and every rino in office would hold a joint press conference and announce that Clinton and both Bushes had offered all of them jobs to quit races.

Impeachment is just one step below a coup. In fact in a way it is a legal coup.

This current administration is governing against the will of the American people. While it is true he won the election, we do not elect dictators, we elect a President to be the chief administrator of the Federal Government.

I am thinking that President Obama may at some point wish his party did not have such complete control over both houses of congress. It would have tempered some of the more extreme movement towards the left. As it is, the Democrats are moving further and faster than the American people want to go. President Obama is going to pay the price for this (he is not blameless, but I think Pelosi and Reid are the main driving force in all this).

It is now clear that Obama does not know what he is doing. It is also clear he has surrounded himself with political ideologues, not competent administrators.

Blaming the Bush Administration is no longer a winning hand
Blaming racism is no longer a winning hand.
What does he have left?
We live in a dangerous world. We now live in a dangerous world where our friends don’t trust us, and our enemies don’t fear us.
It is no longer if we suffer another major terrorist attack, it is only a question when.
That by itself may tip the nation fully against this administration (except for the hard core 30-35% who think Obama is a conservative), but if it is shown the terrorist enter from our southern borders it will be all over for Obama, and perhaps even the Democrat party.

The only defense against impeachment is the support of the American people. This administration has shown what it thinks of the American people. In time they will return the favor.

Seems that several “gates” have just evaporated. Pelosi supposedly lied to Congress, but POOF, the story was gone after a week or two. No matter how egregious, this bunch provides a few juicy headlines for a while and then proceed however they wish.

The people who cleansed Hussein's records were merely hirelings doing the bidding of those who designed the plan.

In retrospect, it's all pretty amazingly simple, isn't it? Grab the reigns of power vested in the Constitution through legitimate electoral means simply by corrupting the electoral process itself.

Once the electorate was sufficiently debased, all they had to do was manufacture & cleanse a candidate based on perceived positive qualities (ie affirmative action to achieve "inclusiveness", etc) promoted to the 'new' debauched electorate.

I seriously doubt Hussein gives a flying f&ck whether he is impeached or not. This whole thing has been a pretty funny little trip, no? Look at it from his perspective; he's doin' a little toot, smoking da chronic, etc, and generally jiving by.

Some people approach him, tell him he's got the 'right stuff' if he agrees to be groomed and basically not do anything - they will take care of everything. Which, of course, they have.

So I put it to you: don't you think he considers this all just a big put on, a lark? Can't we tell from his mannerisms, attitude & demeanor?

The problem isn't Hussein - he's merely a symptom. The real danger to the Republic is the debauched & debased electorate (his hard 25-40% support group) that is still allowed to vote.

I agree with you-—I think we would all just love for him to go away—but that’s what elections are for. I also think that this thing with Sestack (or however it’s spelled) is repeated in the halls of congress more often than we’ll ever know.

49
posted on 05/29/2010 7:10:14 AM PDT
by basil
(It's time to rid the country of "Gun Free Zones" aka "Killing Fields")

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.